| Author |
Topic: Mic or Line in Studio |
Will Brumley
From:
Hubbard, TX
|
Posted 19 Oct 2005 7:01 am |
|
| I am going to be recording in studio next week and was curious on what the recomendations were for recording the steel guitar. The session player is using an MSA Universal with an effects unit. We got some pedal noise in a previous session while micing the amp. The amp was not isolated, however, this time we will have the ability to isolate the amp away from the instrument. Would you suggest that we run a line and not the amp? Are there any suggestions with a mic choice or placement on the speaker other than the standard. |
|
|
 |
Larry Bell
From:
Englewood, Florida
|
Posted 19 Oct 2005 7:19 am
|
|
All you're gonna get here are opinions. Mine is I prefer direct. I spent some time and got a sound I like almost as much as live with much less hassle. If all you have is a guitar, VP, and preamp in line to the board, you've left out any amp noise, mic placement, and a bunch of other possible sources of problems. You don't have to worry about isolation, pedal or amp noise.
I have a bunch of great vintage amps -- both tube and solid state -- but if I can avoid hauling it in a studio and working to get mic placement just right and then living with a little bleed from other instruments when you need to do an overdub, I'll just go direct.
If I played sessions for a living and had a cartage company load and move all my stuff, I'd probably go the same route Paul goes and optimize a rack with pre-, power amp, and effects -- and let somebody else sweat when it's time to move 'em. 
You'll have to decide for yourself, but I've found that a good preamp with EQ optimized for line in to the board works very well for me.
------------------
Larry Bell - email: larry@larrybell.org - gigs - Home Page
2003 Fessenden S/D-12 8x8, 1969 Emmons S/D-12 6x6, 1984 Sho-Bud S/D-12 7x6, 1971 Dobro, Standel and Peavey Amps
|
|
|
|
John Cook
From:
Sarasota, Florida, USA
|
Posted 19 Oct 2005 7:27 am
|
|
| I've had excellent results running direct thru a Line6 Podxt. jc |
|
|
|
Stu Schulman
From:
Ulster Park New Yawk (deceased)
|
Posted 20 Oct 2005 12:08 am
|
|
| Will:I almost always go direct mostly out of lazyness,I set up in the control room therefore I can play out of the monitors instead of phones,If it gets too loud for the engineer I can put on the phones.The only time that I do use an amp is at a friend's studio where he insists on me playing thru an amp. |
|
|
|
Don Sulesky
From:
Citrus County, FL, Orig. from MA & NH
|
Posted 20 Oct 2005 4:11 am
|
|
Although I like the live sound you get from an amp I now always go direct to eliminate any outside noises.
I go from my steel directly into my Hilton pedal into a BBE preamp into my G-Major then into my Fostex Digital recorder. It works for me, but it's only my opinion.
Don[This message was edited by Don Sulesky on 20 October 2005 at 02:33 PM.] |
|
|
|
John Daugherty
From:
Rolla, Missouri, USA
|
Posted 20 Oct 2005 4:43 am
|
|
Will, I have a home studio which allows me to do a lot of experimenting.
I connect my guitar through the volume pedal,then through my effects unit,then a preamp w/EQ, then to the mixer. The preamp and mixer EQs allow me to get a sound I have not been able to get with an amp. If it means anything,there are no tubes in my equipment. It is all solid state.
I think Larry Bell and I have pretty much tried the same experiments and arrived at the same conclusion. What we like and what you like, may be different. I am just stating my own opinion.
------------------
www.phelpscountychoppers.com/steelguitar
|
|
|
|
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 20 Oct 2005 6:32 am
|
|
I usually go "direct" but I'm working on a CD project for my wife (singing) and I decided to mike the amp this time. I'm using a Shure SM57 and it sounds good but I'm not so sure it's worth the hassle of the mic and trying to eliminate feedover to the singers mic or avoid any outside noises.
I've tried my POD XT, with a preamp model and speaker model but I like the Preamp out or the XLR out from a Peavey amp better. Probably, I'm used to the Peavey Parametric EQ and the POD XT doesn't have that. |
|
|
|
David Doggett
From:
Bawl'mer, MD (formerly of MS, Nawluns, Gnashville, Knocksville, Lost Angeles, Bahsten. and Philly)
|
Posted 20 Oct 2005 1:20 pm
|
|
Will, here are Paul Franklin’s thoughts on direct to board versus miked amp with guitar speakers.
quote:
I prefer an imperfect amp situation to the cold sound of a direct signal and I have been in a multitude of these situations throughout my career and I have exhausted all of the known direct options… The Mel Tillis live album used a direct along with the amp. At the mixing stage we hated ALL of the direct lines for the guitars fiddles and such.
It all comes down to personal taste. I hate the way a direct signal plays with the dynamics of the attack of the string and I realize others opt to record direct for the simplicity of isolation, That's their preference, not mine. A speaker in the worst situation allows the note attack to breath before going through the mic to tape. A direct signal simply goes straight to tape and bypasses the ear/mic. There's no substitute that compares to the air and mic in front of a speaker. Having air around the note is the way our ears hear musical instruments. I miss that variable when its taken away.
Switching the subject to playing a live gig, I said:
| Quote: |
| Theoretically, with a multiband EQ you could make the board duplicate the guitar speaker voice. But I wouldn't have a clue how to do that, and would have to play with it for hours. And what would the point be, when I automatically have the tone I want through a speaker I have carefully chosen? |
To which Brad Sarno replied:
| Quote: |
| I don't think there's any eq in the world that can re-create a speaker voice. Speaker voicing isn't just an EQ curve. It's full of dynamic compression that's different at different frequencies, it's got bass damping, the paper is full of distortion and phase anomolies out the yin-yang, air is moving, and more. Those are just some of the reasons a speaker is so musical and colorful sounding. |
We’re just discussing this as you requested, not trying to tell you what to do. Paul and Brad and everyone says you should feel free to do whatever sounds best to you. This question of direct into the board versus miked speakers, for recording or playing live, is an interesting question that has come up many times on the Forum over the years. About a year ago there was a thread where someone provided some sample tracks of several different mics for recording steel. For comparison there was a track that was direct in to the board. I guess I had never knowingly heard solo steel recorded that way. It was very unique sounding, and completely different from the several mic/speaker samples. Because of the extra high overtones that we are not use to hearing through guitar speakers, it sounded to me like someone had made a pedal steel with a hollow acoustic guitar body. Hearing solo steel like that was very interesting, but very unique. I’m not sure how well that would sound in a complete mix. I now realize that Mike Perlowin's very unique steel tone on his classical CDs comes from recording direct. Although it sounds very different, it doesn't sound bad. However, that is solo steel, and that may work differently mixed with a band. Also, some people who record direct may be doing it through an instrument preamp that is voiced for guitar.
This also relates to playing live direct into a PA with a full range speaker with a tweeter. You are attempting to capture the full range sound of the pickup through a full-range, flat-response amplification and speaker system. That full range flat frequency response is the very thing many players find objectionable for guitar and steel. For an acoustic instrument or voice, yes, but not for a solid body instrument with a magnetic pickup. The vast majority of players and amp designers over the years have preferred the special tone given by instrument speakers.
Yes, if you mic your guitar speaker and play it through the PA (or studio monitor), you are playing through a tweeter in the PA speaker. But if the sound starts with a guitar speaker, there is very little high end stuff going to those tweeters. The flat-response PA speaker system is simply faithfully reproducing the more limited frequency range and special sound of the guitar speaker.
A POD or other amp simulator is a completely different situation. The amp and speaker model of the simulator has already reproduced the limited range special sound of a guitar speaker. You don’t need to run that through another guitar speaker. You want to run that through a hi-fi flat response system to exactly reproduce the modeled tone.
A related problem is the use of headphones. I practice at home going direct into a small mixer with a phone jack. The highs and mids are shrill and harsh, and I can’t get any good bottom. I solved the problem by first going into a POD XT with a Twin Reverb 2x12 simulation (I’d use a 1x15 simulation if POD provided it). That sounds pretty good. Some amps provide a headphone circuit that rolls off the highs and boosts the bass to accomplish the same purpose.
It just seems to me that, anytime I play electric guitar or steel directly into a full-range, flat-response speaker system, the highs and mids are too shrill and harsh. But if your ears like that, then there is no reason not to do that.
|
|
|
|
Bill Carpenter
From:
Liberty Hill, Texas, USA
|
Posted 20 Oct 2005 2:11 pm
|
|
| I would use 2 tracks and record it both ways and then listen to both and chose one or blend the two tracks to get the best of both worlds. Thats the wy I usualy try to record anything in my studio. You might also use 3 tracks and use 2 mics on the amp, one up close and one set back further away but not tofar so as to not create a phase canceling situation, and then blend them all together. |
|
|
|
Dave Grafe
From:
Hudson River Valley NY
|
Posted 20 Oct 2005 2:48 pm
|
|
I refer you back to what Stu S. said - with a direct line you can set up in the control booth and thus simplify monitoring and communications with the engineer and/or producer. I have done that quite a lot, particularly on sessions what a wee budget and thus little time to mess about.
That having been said, since switching over to the Randall Steel Man 500 with a JBL E130 last year, I find myself going back into the iso booth (even though I rather dislike wearing messy old cootie-rific headphones for long periods of time) with a good mic (a Sennheiser 409, if you please) in front of the speaker because, well, it just sounds so fine! |
|
|
|
John McClung
From:
Olympia WA, USA
|
Posted 22 Oct 2005 6:24 pm
|
|
I recently went direct to ProTools on a PC, and it was a bad experience. The slightly scratchy pot in my Goodrich vp became a problem; I wound up using an ancient BOSS optical volume pedal, messed up my vp and knee lever mechanics, but it WAS quiet. Next on my wish list is a Hilton pedal! And my rack BOSS 31 band EQ proved a bit noisy. None of this had ever been a problem when micing my Webb amp. So---like PF, I vote for the amp setup whenever possible.
------------------
E9 lessons
Mullen D-12/Carter SD-10/Webb amp/Profex II/Lexicon MPX-110
|
|
|
|
Tony Dingus
From:
Kingsport, Tennessee, USA
|
Posted 22 Oct 2005 6:39 pm
|
|
I usually have to go direct so, I've been using a Genesis 3 with a Lexicon MPX 100 and it works out ok but, I did overdubs this past week and I used a Evans pre-amp with the MPX 100 into a Samson power amp and a pair of Tannoy Reveal speakers and it sound great. I think I'm going to get me a power amp and a couple of 12" black widows to do overdubs with.
Tony |
|
|
|
Bob Hoffnar
From:
Austin, Tx
|
Posted 22 Oct 2005 9:14 pm
|
|
I mike an amp. Sometimes my old deluxe but mostly my 66 showman. I basicly refuse to go direct. I've never had any problems once the producer hears how good it sounds.
------------------
Bob
My Website
|
|
|
|
T. C. Furlong
From:
Lake County, Illinois, USA
|
Posted 23 Oct 2005 7:40 am
|
|
I think whether you go direct or with a mic'd speaker really depends on what the situation is. I have done hundreds of sessions, 80% of which are TV and Radio commercials, the remaining 20% are usually record sessions. In the TV/radio commercial recording environment, it is almost impossible to use an amp because of logistics...rooms size, other musicians in isolated areas, etc. Because of this, I have become used to setting up in the control room and listening over monitors, which I like. Tone is definitely compromised by the direct method though. If you consider that it will be mixed in with the rest of the track and that it will be under the announcer, you can almost justify the method. In the record session environment, there is usually more time and the producer cares more about tone. I had been going direct and using digital tools like Guitar Rig to achieve tone. You get a ton of flexibility and you can really dial in what fits with the textures of guitars etc. But the tone is still lacking.
So here is what I try to do now. If it's a commercial, direct is an acceptable (barely) method. If it is a music session, I take an amp set up. I have a small rack that I put next to me in the control room that has a preamp, reverb and delay. I then put a self-powered speaker in an isolated area like the studio or an isolation booth, hallway, office etc. An XLR cable feeds the self-powered speaker and unlike a speaker cable, it can be located a great distance from the control room without degradation. This way, I get the best of both worlds. I get to set-up in the control room and I get to adjust and listen to my tone through the studio monitors along with the engineer. So far, I am loving this method. And engineers seem to appreciate the "pre-tweaked" source. The best part is that I don't need to use headphones. I have been fortunate to be able to avoid using headphones for many years. It must be a developed skill to play well using headphones.
TC |
|
|
|
Dave Grafe
From:
Hudson River Valley NY
|
Posted 23 Oct 2005 4:43 pm
|
|
Going direct doesn't necessarily mean loss of tonal quality, like everything else, you do have to have the right tools for the job. It only took me about twenty-odd years to get the setup together.
As a result of years of trial and error I finally settled happily on a rack with an Audio Arts 4-band parametric, Audio Arts compressor, Roland SDE2500 delay and Yamaha REV7 reverb. Direct feeds from the REV7 outputs are way sweet, although due to impedance issues some mixing consoles tend to generate a lot of noise when hooked up to it without a separate direct box.
Of course, this is all relatively high-priced stuff as far as audio gear goes (several orders of magnitude above anything that one can get from stomp-boxes or MI effects units) and I have spent years finding the proper settings to get the sound I want (my settings with this rack are listed in another string somewhere on this forum so I won't go into that here).
The proof is in the pudding: I recently went into the studio to add some tracks to a project that I recorded direct with the rack last summer. Since I've been having so much fun playing through the little Randall amp I got last year, this time we put an SM57 mic on the amp using only the internal Accutronics spring reverb for effects. While there is a detectable difference to me, neither sounded significantly "better" than the other and nobody else could even tell the difference - the project as a whole sounds very consistent.
Another overnight success story thirty years in the making....[This message was edited by Dave Grafe on 23 October 2005 at 05:56 PM.] |
|
|
|
T. C. Furlong
From:
Lake County, Illinois, USA
|
Posted 25 Oct 2005 4:27 pm
|
|
Dave, When going direct, what I struggle with is that high frequency "plasticky, directness". I think that a speaker and all of it's intense coloration, especially in the high frequencies, allows the highs to calm down and phase out. I wonder if your ART EQ and comp (and your tweaks) are altering the highs with coloration and phase like a speaker would.
TC |
|
|
|
Dan Tyack
From:
Olympia, WA USA
|
Posted 25 Oct 2005 5:07 pm
|
|
In the last 5 years or so I have gone direct (usually through a POD) maybe 5 times, usually for a jingle or a demo doing a generic clean steel sound. If I care what I sound like I use a mike. If I really care about what I sound like I'll drag along one of my ribbon mikes unless it's a studio I know.
For others it's different, but to get the sound I hear in my head, it's got to be an amp.
------------------
www.tyack.com
|
|
|
|
Dan Tyack
From:
Olympia, WA USA
|
Posted 25 Oct 2005 5:13 pm
|
|
I do understand the issue of engineers wanting me to go direct (the size of the room, isolation, etc). But if it's a music session (as opposed to a commercial, I like that distinction, T.C.) I drag along my 100' speaker cable. There's usually a bathroom or somewhere that I can stash my speaker cabinet. 99% of the time I record just with my THD head, no effects (other than the wah pedal, of course). I usually record in the control room.
------------------
www.tyack.com
|
|
|
|
John Sluszny
From:
Brussels, Belgium
|
Posted 26 Oct 2005 6:36 am
|
|
Mic or Line?
BOTH,on different tracks of course,then you chose what's best. |
|
|
|
T. C. Furlong
From:
Lake County, Illinois, USA
|
Posted 27 Oct 2005 5:44 pm
|
|
Dan, I have been wanting to hear a THD head for steel for a long time. I heard a guitar player using one and it was fantastic sounding. I think I remember reading that they are pretty dang heavy. I'll bet its worth the weight and no plasticky directness coming out of one of those babies. Which head do you like?
TC |
|
|
|
Tim Harr
From:
Dunlap, Illinois
|
Posted 27 Oct 2005 7:29 pm
|
|
DAVID DOGGETT:
POD does have the 1x15" cabinet option on the most current software version.
T.C.: Hey, if you ever get any session calls you have to/want to "pass" on call me. I work in the S. Loop area downtown and live in the West burbs. Cell Ph# 309-369-0102.
Thanks!
Tim |
|
|
|
Dan Tyack
From:
Olympia, WA USA
|
Posted 27 Oct 2005 8:13 pm
|
|
T.C. the THD BiValve is the best for pedal steel, IMHO. A good tube compliment is a good 6l6 or 5881 (I like an old TungSol) combined with a 6550 or a KT88. I also like an at7 in the first preamp tube position. They are a bit heavy, mainly due to the huge transformers, but those do make a difference in tone.
------------------
www.tyack.com
|
|
|
|
James Quackenbush
From:
Pomona, New York, USA
|
Posted 28 Oct 2005 9:58 am
|
|
| Here's something you guy's might want to consider....It's called RE Amping ....You basically record your pedal steel thru a good direct box to your recording medium ....This will give you a nice quiet signal to put down on tape, or digital hard drives ....Maybe not the tone you want , but it's quiet .....Then you take that recording, and run it thru whatever you like....(An amp, an effects unit , a compressor, whatever you like), and then record THAT into another channel ....You can try as many diffent effects, or amps as you like since you already have the track recorded direct to play around with ..Here's a link .......Jim http://www.radialeng.com/di-xamp.htm [This message was edited by James Quackenbush on 28 October 2005 at 11:02 AM.] |
|
|
|
John Macy
From:
Rockport TX/Denver CO
|
|
|
|
Tim Harr
From:
Dunlap, Illinois
|
Posted 31 Oct 2005 5:45 pm
|
|
| ^ |
|
|
|
